0K isn't the lowest temperature ever found. It's the lowest temperature, where there is a complete lack of temperature. Reaching 0K is actually impossible, because many reasons, & hence can't be found. I think then lowest temperature ever found is pretty close to 0K, though, something like 0.0xK

well I am no expert but according to this www.newscientist.com/article/dn18541-what-happens-at-absolute-zero.html#.VARILvlnXw8
the opinions differ, yours seems to be the more known/popular theory. The problem is you cant really check the teories in an experiment as you cant reach the necessary conditions for the experiment. That is actually neatly explained in that article, the reason why you can not reach it. Screenshot attached. But again, we need some more advanced physics-fag over here. Hope I haven´t wasted your time.

its a personal thing, its like saying one language for everyone to know is better instead of so many different ones. but why would you want to learn a new system for world unification if the one you currently use works fine

You say in your example that 1 language (of which there are far more than temperature scales thus making the connection worthless) requires lots of people to learn something new. However, if, as lulzdealer suggests and you seemingly agree with, everyone should use one for everyday purposes and one for scientific purposes then everyone would need to learn the scale that they are unfamiliar with. Thus inconveniencing everyone.

you can't use celsius in the lab because it won't give you the proper units when you plug it into formulas.
also, if you use celsius with the gas law equations there's the possibility of dividing by zero, which doesn't make sense.

We say "degrees" celsius because celsius is not some sort of amount of stuff. 2 meters is twice as much as 1 meter, 2 kilograms is twice as much as 1 kilogram, 2 kelvin is twice as much as 1 kelvin, but 2 degrees celsius is NOT twice as much as 1 degree celsius.

perfectly reasonable. no need to complicate numbers that are only applied to regular life.
i think when i read your comment the first time i interpreted what you said as "i prefer to use celsius for everything, *including use in the lab*"

The reason I prefer farenheit is because 1. I grew up on it obviously so what else am I gonna use and 2. It's more of a 1-10 scale, to me that makes sense. Like 32 degrees celsius doesn't make sense to me idk.
Yes, that specific degree

Okay, well I said I don't know anything in celsius cause I was raised on farenheit and I was kinda kidding when I said that specific degree doesn't make sense. Sorry I'm in some kind of stupid bracket because of that but I don't really feel like getting used to a new type of system that nobody in a thousand mile radius around me uses.

Fahrenheit is based on 0 being the freezing temperature of Salt water and 100 being the ideal human body temperature (i know its 98.6, but the science wasn't exact). So really Fahrenheit is better for humans and centigrade is better for water.

actually Fahrenheit was originally intended to be based off the average temperature of the human body being 100 and 0 being water freezing. obviously when it was set they had a little bit of a temperature.

Yeah, he's wrong. 0 degrees farenheit is actually the freezing point of salt water, the coldest thing he interacted with while making the scale. He didn't like negative numbers, and assumed no one would work with anything colder than frozen salt water.

Which is also ********. Salt water freezes are various temperatures, depending on how much salt is in the water. Water from the ocean freezes at about 28.4 degrees. Water at max saturation, IE no more salt will dissolve into it, freezes at -5.96.

Brine - A solution of salt in water. Salt solutions ranging from about 3.5% (a typical concentration of seawater, or the lower end of solutions used for brining foods) up to about 26% (a typical saturated solution, depending on temperature).

If you'll kindly re-read my comment, you'll notice I covered the entire thing. The freezing point of brine varies, it is not 0 degrees.

That's a funny way of putting it, but it's not too far from the truth. Here's the WIki article talking about the three temperatures it was based off of. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit

Fahrenheit proposed his temperature scale in 1724, basing it on three reference points of temperature.[9] In his initial scale (which is not the final Fahrenheit scale), the zero point is determined by placing the thermometer in brine: he used a mixture of ice, water, and ammonium chloride, a salt, at a 1÷1÷1 ratio. This is a frigorific mixture which stabilizes its temperature automatically: that stable temperature was defined as 0 °F (−17.78 °C). The second point, at 32 degrees, was a mixture of ice and water without the ammonium chloride at a 1÷1 ratio. The third point, 96 degrees, was approximately the human body temperature, then called "blood-heat"

It's something we interact with a lot, yes, we also never truly need to know (in a day-to-day sense) at what temp it boils.

The next time you go to boil some water for noodles I doubt you think "ok it's just about 100 C*, the water will be ready soon". The point of this is most of the Celsius scale goes unused by people day to day. When comparing weather, which is hands down the #1 thing we talk about temp for, celcius only has realistically 0-33 degrees of use. Fahrenheit uses the full spectrum, therefore allowing better accuracy.

The full spectrum of what pray tell? So if you're using Fahrenheit and it goes over 100, you're saying it's beyond farenheits full spectrum? And if you think 33 is the realistic upper limit of celcius you need to come to 'Straya cunt. Or any of the tropics. 33 is ******* mild weather in summer here. We commonly reach 40, and that's on the coast. And if you think 0 is the realistic lower limit, you can go freeze your ass off in Siberia, which has commonly recorded temps of -50 and more. Celcius makes more logical sense because it is based on one medium, which is H2O. Not two arbitrary comparisons, neither of which has a fixed 'norm'

Yes obviously there are extreme locations on the planet that go outside the range I gave. My point is that when you're looking at using a range of numbers to indicate a measurement, a system that has more than half of it's range almost never used for the common use of that measurement (describing the temperature outside at any given time) is less than ideal.

Everybody goes right back to "well water boils at 100 c" which is great, it makes a lot of sense if I ever had to boil water with minimal excess heat. I would be willing to bet nobody on this entire comment section has ever needed that knowledge.

And yet a simple Google will tell you country after country with average temperatures that can reach (and sometimes exceed) 50 C. Mexico, Somalia, India, Sudan, Iran, Algeria, Iraq, Saudi Arabi, Libya. And those are just countries where the averages can range from the high 30s to the low 50s. Large populations too. Then we have the cold countries, Finland often reaches -20 C, Mongolia goes below even that, bearing in mind that you only need it to be 0 to get frosts, let alone snow. -20 is fricken cold. Then you have Iceland which can go below -40 C, Then Greenland which has an average summer temp of just 7 degrees. Even the USA commonly achieves -30 C, and not just in Alaska. Then you've got Canada, which goes below -40 in some places, in Russia, depending on where you are, there are parts that record average summer temps of -3, plenty cold enough for snow, they also record winter temps of -50. And while there may not be a permanent population in Antarctica, there have still been temps recorded of -89 C. That is a difference of over 130 degrees C. And omg, a simple Google search told me that. Bear in mind now, that's over 18 countries that, except for the united states, use Celcius EVERY ******* DAY And given that Celcius (and farenheit too) can and do go over 100 degrees, I really do not see what you mean by this range thing of yours, unless you mean the 'average temperature range' of any given country, in which case why didn't you specify. So basically, Celcius still makes more sense.

We're stuck with it till our economy is better. If we chance now, all of our "Socialism" is going to want us to replace every instrument of measurement in existence, causing a bigger economic problem. There are flaws, but it doesn't hurt anyone as much as if we would chance it.

It's not arbitrary, it's just not centered around having easy conversions. Not saying it's better than Metric, but calling it Arbitrary and retarded to exaggerate the differences is only hurting your own cause by making you look like a pompous ass.

And the date system is easier because that's how you say it. I.E. you would say it's March 17, 2017, and then would write the date the same way.

ar·bi·trar·y
adjective
based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

On Fahrenheit's original scale the lower defining point was the lowest temperature to which he could reproducibly cool brine (defining 0 degrees)

The precise origin of the yard is not definitely known. Some believe it derived from the length of a stride or pace. One postulate was that the yard was derived from the girth of a person's waist, while another claim held that the measure was invented by Henry I of England as being the distance between the tip of his nose and the end of his thumb.

As for the numbers themselves, base 12 and base 16 do each have their own merits, but what possible logical reason could you have to do your maths in base 10, your weight in base 16, and your length in base 12? Nothing fits together and the only reason not to make it fit is "well that's just the way it's always been"

And people who write the date dd/mm/yy instead of mm/dd/yy do not say March 17th, they say the 17th of March.

American English basically attempts to make things roll off the tongue the easiest, "The 23rd of March" takes slightly longer than "March 23rd" so we changed it.

For many places 0 is very cold and 100 is very hot, whereas with Celsius you stay at the beginning half I believe? Not sure for the most part. I'd much rather use Celsius in a lab than in everyday use.

SI units instead of metric is simply because we don't want to change, originally a long time ago someone made inch and foot the standard units and then miles and yards just arbitrarily and we stuck with it.

I say "23rd March" in speech, but I still write D/M/Y.
Dunno why you guys felt you had to change the written format to follow the spoken word format. In speech most people say the month by name not by number so there's no need to clarify.

**mrloki rolled image** ehhh, you should remove Brazil from that list, while SUS (sistema unico de saude) the "free health care" - does exist ... it's known more as free deathcare ...

You go in for emergency surgery because you got run over by a truck and it they schedule your "emergency surgery" 48 hours after you've got to the hospital. You go in with a heart attack, you get out dead, because there are no doctors to treat you...

If you want to have medical assistance in Brazil, you need a plano de saude - a paid health care - those will try to rob you and won't actually offer you quality service, but you can get emergency help and some normal doctors for when you got a wild rash or something

They did it thanks to German know how. Google name Wernher von Braun. First american ballistic rocket were old V2 rocket with USA flag on it. Apollo also had rocket designed mostly by german scientists.

I live in the midwest, can confirm. If your snot isn't freezing as soon as you breathe in, it's not cold. side note, there was one time when I was in school where i had an airhead, and as soon as I stepped off the bus, it froze and shattered when I tried to eat it

Freezers aren't that cold d00d, I've been in walk in freezers and camped when it's -7 IN the cabin. With a wood stove burning like a buddhist and we had a torpedo heater 12 feet from my cot, hooked up to a gas generator outside.

Yea i would have no idea about that, grew up in a beach town the coldest it ever got was single digits, i spent last winter in nc's mountains and it got super cold we had a week straight of minus weather..although it was pretty bad all over

granted, I'm not going to go out swimming during single digit weather, but I don't feel really cold until the negative temperatures. I will ride my bike in negative weather though. Last winter there were days where it was zero at my house and I had to ride my bike along the river. I guess it had to be -15 on my bike.

some people in Russia go out on a cold winters day before the lakes are completely frozen, cut a large area out of the ice and challenge each other to swim from one end to the other in roughly that kind of temperatures.

Because exchange rates.
IF your body were 100 degrees it would boil. Being in a 100 degree environment does not instantly change your core temperature.
Skin is an insulator of sorts and it won't boil as easily as your blood or cerebral fluid. The circulation of your blood ensures that everypart of you exchanges heat so that if there is even the smallest amount of cool blood still in you, it'll keep you cool.
Have you ever roasted a hundred pound piece of meat? It takes hours to cook for a reason. Heat doesn't penetrate flesh that easily.

Oh yes you'll definitely get burned but I mean, your insides won't boil or anything which was basically my only point. Your exterior will take most of the blow and it takes a long time to get through that.

As explained in this thread. However, it's still slightly dangerous - a finnish and a russian went to a sauna. The russian died. No joke, this happened in the World Sauna Championship 2010, the russian died (death aided by usin local anesthetic grease and painkillers - ill play kills you) and the finnish had 70% of his skin burnt and later kidney failure. He recovered, but was under a medically induced coma for over a month.

This combined with sweating. The vaporization of sweat from your skin also cools you down.
I believe an experiment was conducted several decades ago where two men were observed, free to go and remark on temperatures getting uncomfortable, and they made it past 140 degrees celcius. I can't back that experiment up though, because I don't have time to google it.

The water one is kind of a stupid point though. Why should water's freezing point have to be the basis of the temperature scale? (I'm not supporting the 'muricans, just saying that specific argument is silly)